LADOT Reveals Designs for Spring Street Buffered Bike Lane

Via the LADOT Bike Blog comes a first look at the Spring Street Buffered Bike Lanes planned for Downtown Los Angeles. Having spent some time this weekend on the “bike paths” on 3rd and Broadway in Downtown Long Beach this weekend, I can’t tell you what a difference a buffer makes.

Even though these lanes aren’t quite the same as the ones in Long Beach, there’s a lot of excitement for the lanes, which the city has promised will be open for business by the end of the year. The excitement has led to a lot of speculation on when in December the lanes are going to open, although I’m starting to hear buzz that they might be open even sooner than that.

When I’m riding on a street with parking, my #1 danger is from being doored. Getting hit by a car that’s passing too close — especially when the right-lane-plus-bike-lane is 22 feet wide — is a very distant second.

So shouldn’t this buffer be on the other side of the bike lane, to take the bike lane out of the door zone? Or maybe a smaller buffer on both sides of the bike lane? Like, maybe 12-10-12-3-5-3-7?

Clutch J

@ Joe B

The buffer appears to be made of only paint, so you’ll be able to ride outside the door zone. It would be good to experiment with some buffered lanes in between parked cars and the curb, too.

Chris Loos

I heard through the grapevine that the lane will be done before the end of November.

When I left for work this morning I saw that the line and buffer is completely outlined. They just need to fill it in with paint.

Revebleu

Why would they put parking on the right side of the buffered bike lane? Why not use the parked cars as the buffer? How many people will be hit by clueless drivers pulling into the bike lane to park?

Revebleu

It’s also inviting a car to double park in the bike lane as there’s plenty of space for the car.

I agree that parked cars should be used as the buffer with the bike lane next to the footpath. Also, there should be bollards between the bike lane and the parking lane to further protect cyclists from parking cars and preventing cars encroaching onto the bike lane. LADOT’s design is a fail.

There is the space there to do it properly, in Netherlands style, but LADOT doesn’t appear to have the will to do it properly.

If it’s OK for cyclists to have to ride next to fast-moving motor vehicles without a physical buffer, as per LADOT’s design, then why isn’t it OK for motorists exiting their parked cars to experience the same risk? This is still a car-centric design and will do very little to encourage a normal person to cycle.

Anonymous

Ugh! Didn’t LADOT hog the meeting with the Dutch? Why?

It’s Sidewalk/Cycle Track/Parking/Travel Lane(s)/Median/opposing Travel Lane(s)-if any/opposing Cycletrack (Yes, even if this is a one-way street for gasoholics)/Sidewalk!

This above proposal is crap, especially if the buffer isn’t going to be used to keep us from being doored!

Word On The Street

“With 6 to 7 million cars registered in LA County, it's really laughable to hear the supposedly most progressive thinkers around on the topic go for reducing the number of autos by a mere 100,000 by 2020! Why not 3.5 million? Cut the damn things in half.”